W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > January 2014

RE: Fwd: Language Tag Case Conflict (between RDF1.1 and BCP47)

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:21:23 +0100
To: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00dc01cf15ea$e5f84f60$b1e8ee20$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Monday, January 20, 2014 2:53 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
> We have finalized the text except for clearly editorial fixes; we have
> done the testing and gathered reports.  Anything that is a visible
> change by anyone's reading invalidates that and we have to go round the
> cycle from LC again.
> 
> The proposed text is a change to RDF - it moves language tag equality
> from the value space to the stored form (it connects the MAY text to
> the MUST NOT text).

Right.


> However good an idea is, it's too late (and I wanted to insist on BCP47
> normalization!).

Actually, this is not a new request but a reply to a thread that was started
back in March 2013 by Hong Sun:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Mar/0039.html

Perhaps all we have to do is to say we already discussed it!? We could also
add a sentence clarifying that implementations do not have to store language
tags in normalized form. If we want to go a step further I think we could
even modify the MAY statement from

  Lexical representations of language tags MAY be converted to lower case.

to 

  Lexical representations of language tags MAY be converted to lower case
  or formatted according [BCP47].

MAY statements do not carry much weight as they describe completely optional
"features". The statement above just highlights that implementations can
legitimately change the lexical representation without affecting the meaning
of a statement. I thus do not see this as a change to RDF but a
clarification. Does anyone disagree?


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Monday, 20 January 2014 14:21:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:18 UTC